Probably became a habit.mike150160 wrote: ↑ Ah Jenny!! Even in the Railway Children she took her drawers off.
https://i2-prod.dailyrecord.co.uk/incom ... 288143.jpg
Probably became a habit.mike150160 wrote: ↑ Ah Jenny!! Even in the Railway Children she took her drawers off.
PZ at his most dishonest takes up the cause:Kirbmarc wrote: ↑ So, in other news, Steven Pinker of all people has been smeared as an alt-right fan:
Who's the guy who creatively edited Pinker's talk to make it look like he supported the alt-right? Why, no one other than Sacha "Seminal Work" Saeen, a known liar who repeatedly tried to smear Sam Harris by quoting him selectively/pretending not to understand what he's writing.
For those of you who don't known Sacha, he's best buddies with Dan Arel ('nuff said), who praised his "seminal work".
It's not our fault you and the commies nabbed all the best German scientists.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ The concept, that the British could have a manned space program, categorizes LIFEFORCE as a comedy.
If you hadn't stopped for tea....Shatterface wrote: ↑It's not our fault you and the commies nabbed all the best German scientists.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ The concept, that the British could have a manned space program, categorizes LIFEFORCE as a comedy.
Have you not been following Millennial Woes homebrew version?VickyCaramel wrote: ↑ I should also say that the Alt-Right is largely America's problem. Richard Spencer is not offering to solve Europe's problems as far as I know.
We have problems of our own, I don't really need to be thinking of ways to solve black crime in America. The Alt-Right is fringe over there, it doesn't even register on the radar over here. I think the BNP got one or two councillors in decades of trying. when the alt-right have more seats than the Greens, then I'll worry.
Some of both - maybe not surprising when the issue is complex and the response is to several different threads, issues, and interlocutors. :-) But generally one can agree with various premises and disagree with the conclusion, and vice versa.VickyCaramel wrote: ↑I am not quite sure if you are agreeing with me or disagreeing.Steersman wrote: ↑Hope you didn't lose any of what you had written - can be extremely frustrating when that happens, for one reason or another.VickyCaramel wrote: ↑Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:59 pmI was trying to answer this when the site crashed.Steersman wrote: ↑Sun Jan 07, 2018 1:27 pm<snip>
And why do you think "the alt-right is wrong even if those differences exist"? Maybe because, as I've argued, many on the alt-right think that those differences apply to ALL members of the different races? That, for instance, all whites are more intelligent than all blacks?
However, while you've apparently "bought into race realism", I'm not entirely sure you've answered the question "why the alt-right is wrong", particularly related to my surmise. Of maybe some related interest or as a point of reference, the Wikipedia article on the topic which, somewhat uncharacteristically for them, seems off-kilter in disputing the concept of races and the idea that there can be differences, in general, between them:
<snip>
Sure seems highly problematic, at best, to be thinking that a person's skin colour, or any distinguishing attribute of any "race" for that matter, uniquely or categorically correlates with any particular set of values - good, bad, or indifferent. Presumably it is those values which are more likely to determine whether the corresponding cultures can "play well with others" or not.
Certainly frustrating to have to argue with the terminally clueless, the stubborn, and the dogmatic. Although there's always some possibility of being guilty of that, at least to some degree, oneself. And that one might learn something from the exercise. Reminds me of a couple of observations by several mathematicians - from a popularization of a particular topic [Stalking the Riemann Hypothesis]:VickyCaramel wrote: ↑My argument was that it isn't worth arguing with the alt-right. The very questions you raised are one of the reasons why. I will let somebody else argue about the Jewish conspiracy (or not quite a conspiracy) or if it is all tribes that can't play nice together, or just most, or maybe some. The Alt-right and far right have enough ammunition for fighting that battle indefinitely... but it doesn't really matter as the main chunk of the alt right seems little different to National Socialists and the rest of it seems exactly like National Socialists. Never mind the bad optics, I am not buying what they are selling.
Yes they are useful idiots by raising awareness of racial issues. They point out the problems even though they have no palatable solutions.
... Connes recalls that his first teacher, Gustave Coquet, once remarked, "One does, by openly facing a well-known unsolved problem,
run the risk of being remembered more by one's failure than anything else." Nevertheless, Connes concludes, "After reaching a certain age, I realized that waiting 'safely' until one reaches the end point of one's life is an equally self-defeating alternative."
One might argue that the human tribe is the one with the greatest call on our individual allegiances, although that's hardly a guarantee that that one is always and necessarily beyond reproach.Of all the frictional resistances, the one that most retards human movement is ignorance, what Buddha called 'the greatest evil in the world.' The friction which results from ignorance ... can be reduced only by the spread of knowledge and the unification of the heterogeneous elements of humanity. No effort could be better spent.
Yeah; indeed. Sure wonder what it will take to galvanize (some zinc?) the population into realizing the odious and problematic nature of Islam. Although there is an increasing awareness that, as Anjuli Pandavar cogently put it some time ago, we are and have been "sleep-walking into a nightmare" due to an inability to fashion a "realistic perspective on and appropriate response to Islam". Ounce of prevention and all that.VickyCaramel wrote: ↑ In regards to UK/Europe -- My prediction, and I suspect that it will probably be the best outcome, is that one day after some Somali immigrant has slaughtered a bus load of school kids, it will trigger a happening. it might be that the authorities crack down and the Muslims riot, or it might be that white people decide they have had enough, and a powderkeg which has been brewing will explode. This will cause a climate where those who don't share Western values will no want to stay and force the sitting government to take draconian measures to end sectarian violence. And when it's all over, people will want to get back to liberal democracy and the rule of law... hopefully with a stronger constitution and new bill of rights. This would be preferable to voting in a far right government.
The British have a distinct culture where we improvise and muddle through, I hope we can muddle through this one.
Nor given away the secret of the moving tailplane, learned painfully on the Miles M.52.TheMudbrooker wrote:If you hadn't stopped for tea....Shatterface wrote: ↑It's not our fault you and the commies nabbed all the best German scientists.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ The concept, that the British could have a manned space program, categorizes LIFEFORCE as a comedy.
How many of you are scared of being insider traded at a red light? Or embezzled in a dark parking lot?If you’re referring to the NCVS, there’s a pretty heavy skew in favor of recording the sorts of crimes that people of color are arrested for (ie illegal drug related offenses being grouped in under the ‘severe crime’ category) while completey cutting out the types of crimes disproportionately committed by white people (ie white collar financial crime).
That is, of course, also discounting the usual gamut of problems with surveys – victims are fallible and by virtue of living in the US are inundated with racism and bigotry.
Defintely far from a bulelt-proof source, and certainly not one that dismisses the idea of unjust criminalisation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miles_M.52
83 responses - Peezy is probably creaming his BVDs right now.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑PZ at his most dishonest takes up the cause:Kirbmarc wrote: ↑ So, in other news, Steven Pinker of all people has been smeared as an alt-right fan:
[bleat][/tweet]
[bleat][/tweet]
Who's the guy who creatively edited Pinker's talk to make it look like he supported the alt-right? Why, no one other than Sacha "Seminal Work" Saeen, a known liar who repeatedly tried to smear Sam Harris by quoting him selectively/pretending not to understand what he's writing.
[bleat][/tweet]
For those of you who don't known Sacha, he's best buddies with Dan Arel ('nuff said), who praised his "seminal work".
http://archive.is/pJEAI
Hmm. Let me add my two cents.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑One of Mykeru's links (now misplaced) indicated that how they dug out a spot for the tent could've undermined the snow bank on the grade, leading to a slab of the hard upper crust of snow to slide down. They might then fear subsequent avalanches. If this is indeed what happened, I believe the unexpected nature of it adversely affected their decision-making. And if you're suddenly crushed in a dark, flattened tent, you're not orientated very well.jet_lagg wrote: ↑ How would a person come to believe an avalanche was imminent (and so flee their tent)? I can't think of anything obvious and googling only reveals what to do in the seconds when you see/feel the fracture line appear and can move laterally quickly enough to get out of the path. The time frame you have to act in appears to be seconds, which could explain cutting through the tent and running in your underwear (again, assuming they somehow sensed the avalanche from inside the tent) but not why they ran downhill. Maybe conventional wisdom was different then, but even that leaves the question of why they'd continue to flee long after the point it would have become clear the danger had passed or was never there to begin with.
It's all speculative, but beyond the fear of avalanche, the possible motivating factors rapidly turn implausible, from infrasound-induced madness to weapons testing, to escaped gulag prisoners, to yeti.
Apparently, the tent was collapsed laterally. Two of the party were slightly better dressed. Had they been the ones by the door, they could have then cut out the others trapped by the partitions in the collapsed tent. And it turns out the forensics, indicating the cuts came from the inside, is not solid. Three of the party had fancy Finnish knives; two of the knives were found inside the tent, still in the pockets of their owner's snow smocks. The third was found on the body of the older guy, Semen (yes that was his name), and he was also one of better dressed ones.
Once they'd fled the tent and proceeded downhill, they were fucked. Hell, once they'd shredded their tent, they were probably fucked. They needed to find a way to stay warm. The little fire didn't work -- two froze to death beside it -- and three attempted to regain the tent. Apparently the snow shelter Semen built for him and the remaining three was not considered sufficient. They'd cached some supplies in the woods that morning, and it seems likely they were searching for that when they fell into the ravine. Semen probably lasted the longest, as he scavenged clothing off the woman who'd bashed her head straight onto a rock.
Nope. Last I saw he had about 40k subscribers, and I bet most of them are American. This is somebody with less subs than Australian Mens Rights Activist Gary Orsum....He's a nobody in terms of National politics.MarcusAu wrote: ↑Have you not been following Millennial Woes homebrew version?VickyCaramel wrote: ↑ I should also say that the Alt-Right is largely America's problem. Richard Spencer is not offering to solve Europe's problems as far as I know.
We have problems of our own, I don't really need to be thinking of ways to solve black crime in America. The Alt-Right is fringe over there, it doesn't even register on the radar over here. I think the BNP got one or two councillors in decades of trying. when the alt-right have more seats than the Greens, then I'll worry.
It’s best I/we don’t pretend there is much evidence for the tent trigger.
Heh, the great thing about Russian compilations is you get that bizarre mixture of Darwin-award-level stupidity and wonderful improvisational ingenuity.
I'm not quite getting the reference, given that Icehouse was Australian, unless you mean the accusations of racism that were reinforced by this particular song. But, to the extent that this has gotten me thinking about Jenny Agutter so early in the day ... thanks.
The quote in question is not as bad as you suggest:SM1957 wrote: ↑ Black people are incredibly genetically similar to white people and very genetically distinct from other black people.
Claims http://londonstudent.coop/news/2018/01/ ... azi-links/
And when you fix the word "any" (by replacing it with something that means close to the opposite), Rutherford almost has a point.“As soon as you begin to speak about black people and IQ you have a problem, because genetically-speaking ‘black people’ aren’t one homogenous group,” Rutherford said. “Any two people of recent African descent are likely to be more genetically distinct from each other than either of them is to anyone else in the world.”
I'd conflated 'Great Southern Land' (which could be Australia or South Africa, both) & 'Southern Man' along with 'Lauren Southern' (who is a man), and Brives general unapolagetic innate antipodean 'Southerness' without quite resolving what all the connections were. Then had to write it down to get exorcise the earworm / engram / broadcast storm.Billie from Ockham wrote: ↑ I'm not quite getting the reference, given that Icehouse was Australian, unless you mean the accusations of racism that were reinforced by this particular song. But, to the extent that this has gotten me thinking about Jenny Agutter so early in the day ... thanks.
My favorite Russian Darwin award nominee (he survived).gurugeorge wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:12 amGreat thing about Russian compilations is you get that bizarre mixture of Darwin-award-level stupidity and wonderful improvisational ingenuity.
Some people were upset by the ideas (which they [somehow] extracted from the lyrics to Great Southern Land) that (a) aborigines were white before "moving" to Australia and (b) aborigines are an example of "primitive man."MarcusAu wrote: ↑I'd conflated 'Great Southern Land' (which could be Australia or South Africa, both) & 'Southern Man' along with 'Lauren Southern' (who is a man), and Brives general unapolagetic innate antipodean 'Southerness' without quite resolving what all the connections were. Then had to write it down to get exorcise the earworm / engram / broadcast storm.Billie from Ockham wrote: ↑ I'm not quite getting the reference, given that Icehouse was Australian, unless you mean the accusations of racism that were reinforced by this particular song. But, to the extent that this has gotten me thinking about Jenny Agutter so early in the day ... thanks.
Any deeper meaning would have to be at a sub-conscious level.
Not sure what it has to do with Agutter, but I'm due for my afternoon walkabout, so I'll leave it there.
Or just add 'random' to make it 'any random'.Billie from Ockham wrote: ↑The quote in question is not as bad as you suggest:SM1957 wrote: ↑ Black people are incredibly genetically similar to white people and very genetically distinct from other black people.
Claims http://londonstudent.coop/news/2018/01/ ... azi-links/And when you fix the word "any" (by replacing it with something that means close to the opposite), Rutherford almost has a point.“As soon as you begin to speak about black people and IQ you have a problem, because genetically-speaking ‘black people’ aren’t one homogenous group,” Rutherford said. “Any two people of recent African descent are likely to be more genetically distinct from each other than either of them is to anyone else in the world.”
I've seen that more than once. It's a last ditch gambit to stave off the conclusion anyone who actually looks at crime stats will draw. Just announce confidently that minorities commit less white collar crime (this may be true, I don't know) and hope anyone listening nods and forgets about the whole thing before they remember violent crime is considered more egregious by pretty much everyone.Really? wrote: ↑ Vivec's comment on PZ's Pinker piece is hilarious.How many of you are scared of being insider traded at a red light? Or embezzled in a dark parking lot?If you’re referring to the NCVS, there’s a pretty heavy skew in favor of recording the sorts of crimes that people of color are arrested for (ie illegal drug related offenses being grouped in under the ‘severe crime’ category) while completey cutting out the types of crimes disproportionately committed by white people (ie white collar financial crime).
That is, of course, also discounting the usual gamut of problems with surveys – victims are fallible and by virtue of living in the US are inundated with racism and bigotry.
Defintely far from a bulelt-proof source, and certainly not one that dismisses the idea of unjust criminalisation.
And it seems like Vivec is calling the victims liars with regard to their testimony or something.
Crime is sexist. We need more to get more women to be interested in crime. There are far too few female bank robbers and murderers compared to the general population.Shatterface wrote: ↑ #339 Unread post by Shatterface » Thu Jan 11, 2018 7:26 pm
It's bad when Damore suggests some people might be better suited to IT related jobs but not bad to say black people suck at embezzlement.
Does the undisputed fact that africans are different from each other bear any relevance to all of them being different to a european?Billie from Ockham wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:17 amNope. It's the opposite of "random." The idea is that there are at least two sub-populations of African blacks (which an ignorant racist like me might call the skinny ones from the east side vs the rounder ones from the west side) that are more different from each other than each are different from, for example, a European white. So, you have to choose the two blacks in question quite carefully to get two that meets the requirements. It can't be done using a random process and it won't be true for "any" two African blacks.
In local Pit parlance, this is what's known as 'doing a Laden'.Bhurzum wrote: ↑ Fuck sake.
I just got home from visiting a friend. As I drove back into the village, I stopped at the little general store on the outskirts to buy a few bits and pieces and grab some cash from the ATM on the side of the building. As I walked around the corner, I noticed two young women ("Burds" in the local tongue) hammering away on the keypad of the ATM so I took a seat on the little wall that follows the stairs up to the ATM. Two minutes later, the girls leave, I hit the ATM and snag some cash. Inside, I grabbed the stuff I was after (dog food, newspaper, milk etc) and head to the checkout. Stood in the queue, the two girls (19-20 years old) move in behind me and start to snigger and giggle in hushed tones. Out of the corner of my eye, I spotted one of them pointing at my ass and her friend digging her in the ribs with her elbow - then the two of them start giggling again.
At this point, my ego inflated to titanic proportions ("You've still got it, you charming old bastard" I thought to myself) and with a spring in my step, I moved forward, paid for my crap then went back out to the car. As I started the engine, I noticed a really strange but incredibly foul smell.
Turns out, I hadn't noticed a large pile of shit on the back edge of the wall (fuck knows how it got up there) and had sat on it. The girls were sniggering at the huge streak of shit all over my ass and the back of my leg.
Not only has my ego taken a hammering, I now have to clean up the car and bin/burn a good pair of jeans.
Fuck my life.
:(
The delusional nature of these statements is alarming because this sort of denial is so widespread.jet_lagg wrote: ↑I've seen that more than once. It's a last ditch gambit to stave off the conclusion anyone who actually looks at crime stats will draw. Just announce confidently that minorities commit less white collar crime (this may be true, I don't know) and hope anyone listening nods and forgets about the whole thing before they remember violent crime is considered more egregious by pretty much everyone.Really? wrote: ↑ Vivec's comment on PZ's Pinker piece is hilarious.How many of you are scared of being insider traded at a red light? Or embezzled in a dark parking lot?If you’re referring to the NCVS, there’s a pretty heavy skew in favor of recording the sorts of crimes that people of color are arrested for (ie illegal drug related offenses being grouped in under the ‘severe crime’ category) while completey cutting out the types of crimes disproportionately committed by white people (ie white collar financial crime).
That is, of course, also discounting the usual gamut of problems with surveys – victims are fallible and by virtue of living in the US are inundated with racism and bigotry.
Defintely far from a bulelt-proof source, and certainly not one that dismisses the idea of unjust criminalisation.
And it seems like Vivec is calling the victims liars with regard to their testimony or something.
Shhh. It's best not to think too hard about memes that confirm your bias.VickyCaramel wrote: ↑Does the undisputed fact that africans are different from each other bear any relevance to all of them being different to a european?Billie from Ockham wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:17 amNope. It's the opposite of "random." The idea is that there are at least two sub-populations of African blacks (which an ignorant racist like me might call the skinny ones from the east side vs the rounder ones from the west side) that are more different from each other than each are different from, for example, a European white. So, you have to choose the two blacks in question quite carefully to get two that meets the requirements. It can't be done using a random process and it won't be true for "any" two African blacks.
It can't be s lack of interest in crime. At least half of the top crime writers are women and the women I know are certainly interested in serial killers and such. I think women just don't apply themselves when it comes to actually committing crime. Lazy fuckers.Kirbmarc wrote: ↑Crime is sexist. We need more to get more women to be interested in crime. There are far too few female bank robbers and murderers compared to the general population.Shatterface wrote: ↑ #339 Unread post by Shatterface » Thu Jan 11, 2018 7:26 pm
It's bad when Damore suggests some people might be better suited to IT related jobs but not bad to say black people suck at embezzlement.
La-Den, god of outrageous misfortune has clearly blessed me this day!
Time to shatter those glass prison bars?Shatterface wrote: ↑I think women just don't apply themselves when it comes to actually committing crime. Lazy fuckers.
It is not laziness, it is self control as any mother of a teenager would gladly tell you.Shatterface wrote: ↑It can't be s lack of interest in crime. At least half of the top crime writers are women and the women I know are certainly interested in serial killers and such. I think women just don't apply themselves when it comes to actually committing crime. Lazy fuckers.Kirbmarc wrote: ↑Crime is sexist. We need more to get more women to be interested in crime. There are far too few female bank robbers and murderers compared to the general population.Shatterface wrote: ↑ #339 Unread post by Shatterface » Thu Jan 11, 2018 7:26 pm
It's bad when Damore suggests some people might be better suited to IT related jobs but not bad to say black people suck at embezzlement.
Before they abolished the death penalty it would have been the glass trap door.Bhurzum wrote: ↑Time to shatter those glass prison bars?Shatterface wrote: ↑I think women just don't apply themselves when it comes to actually committing crime. Lazy fuckers.
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... -out-prey/Evidence that raptors spread brushfires to flush out prey
Now the paper at hand is far from conclusive, but it raises questions that really do deserve investigation, for it suggests that at least three species of Australian raptors, jointly called “firehawks,” spread brushfires to flush out prey. If true, that would mean that birds either “use fire” or “weaponize fire”—something known only in our own species.
It’s long been known that predatory birds from many places hang around the edges of spreading fires to snap up prey fleeing incineration or to feast on burnt corpses. But what’s new about this paper by Mark Bonta et al. in the Journal of Ethnobiology (reference below, free text and pdf) is the description of raptors carrying in their beaks or talons burning sticks from places on fire to places yet unburned, igniting new fires (they spread quickly) and flushing out more prey to eat. The study was conducted in Northern Australia, and the behavior hasn’t been described in other areas.
https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/fai ... l_Meme.jpgShatterface wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2018 12:04 pmOver at Jerry's:
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... -out-prey/Evidence that raptors spread brushfires to flush out prey
Now the paper at hand is far from conclusive, but it raises questions that really do deserve investigation, for it suggests that at least three species of Australian raptors, jointly called “firehawks,” spread brushfires to flush out prey. If true, that would mean that birds either “use fire” or “weaponize fire”—something known only in our own species.
It’s long been known that predatory birds from many places hang around the edges of spreading fires to snap up prey fleeing incineration or to feast on burnt corpses. But what’s new about this paper by Mark Bonta et al. in the Journal of Ethnobiology (reference below, free text and pdf) is the description of raptors carrying in their beaks or talons burning sticks from places on fire to places yet unburned, igniting new fires (they spread quickly) and flushing out more prey to eat. The study was conducted in Northern Australia, and the behavior hasn’t been described in other areas.